[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The GreatViews expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.

That I am against the “referendum” prank you already know: If Iranians want to remove the Mafia state in its entirety, they obviously will not be signatories to a document that, in fact, as a rehabilitation of the “reformist” projet, would guarantee its longevity for perhaps another twenty five years. I cannot say, then, that this communiqué prompted a reconsideration of my position. Instead, I was more absorbed with a reassessment of the role of an individual whom, as the political, and a cultural, symbol of our nationhood, among other reasons, I have hitherto considered the leader of the Iranian movement. (“Iranian opposition movement”, in view of the anti-Iranian nature of the puppet regime and its allies, is, in truth, redundant.)

I cannot say that I can look at this matter as positively as our untiring compatriot Cyrus. Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi’s signing of the “petition” may indeed be yet another gesture of good will, it may be imagined to have certain intrinsic value, and it may even have been signed due to consideration that escape ours (in which case they deserved mention), but these in my opinion, even if true, could not objectively have outweighed the obvious, and numerable, negative ramifications. Most notably, his signature on this petition represents a glaring contradiction of his previous position that a referendum should naturally follow, not precede, the fall of the Islamic Republic. However well intentioned, this gesture on his part may appease the several thousand signatories of this “petition”---25 years of IR slaughter and it is Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi who must appease the republic’s founders!---but it alienates the overwhelming majority of the Iranian population. Also, given the importance of this “petition” and our increasing concerns, the subject deserved more than the three-minute message allotted to it by Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi.

p.s. Cyrus,

Regarding “Iran va Jahan”, run by Shahin Fatemi, one of the theoreticians of this petition admittedly long before Sazgara, be grateful that the Activistchat logo is no longer disgraced for having appeared next to articles by Hossein Bagherzadeh, Fatemi, Radio Farda and the BBC!

He is supporting a referendum that takes place after regime change not before, which has been his consistant position all along. Meanwhile he is not condemning the 60 million referendum (which I will refer to as 60MR), because it is a step in the right direction, even though its many steps short of the destination.

For now, I think RP has the right attitude. Support the right referendum, which is after regime change, but avoid attacking any movement against the regime including the 60MR since it is counter productive. It is going to take everyone, and evey opposition group and then some to get rid of the Mullah$!

As a result of the west's total lack of support for Iran's opposition movement and the protest waves of a few years ago, the Mullah$ have had a chance to firm their grip on power. Assuming that they are on schedule to aquire their nuclear weapons before the end of the year, there isn't much time left. The problem is at this point, with Iraq heading either in the direction of a Shiite theocracy or civil war or both, the propsects for total disintegration of Iran alongside the balkanization of Iraq and the rest of the area is a serious danger.

RP, like everyone else, has to act in this short window of opportunity that remains. The west has all but abandoned the Iranian opposition, the EU is greedy and immoral, China which has muscled its way in to replace Japan thanks to Bush's foot dragging will do anything to keep the Mullah$ in power, ditto the Russian mob, and Hamas and hezbollah (desperate as they slowly get minimised in the west bank and lebanon) will also fight to the death for their Qom paymasters. Basically it leaves Iran in the most vulnerable position its ever been in, with no reliable allies, just greedy neighbors hellbent on taking everything ... in view of all of these grave and present dangers, I don't think anyone has the luxury of ideals. I'd hate to say it, but at this point, it may have to come down to the lesser of all evils.

Its seems counter productive to attack movements against the Mullah$. I think its important to be clear about what works and what doesn't, but avoid infighting. The situation has gotten far worst than it was a few years ago, so criticism of various opposition groups and divisions may not be a luxury that is available anymore. A few years ago, the Mullah$ were not so firmly in power, and disintegration of Iran not as much of a danger. Now things are very different I'm afraid.

I watched today’s conference. I have also LISTENED to the Jan 5th message, which gives a different impression than its written version. I of course did not and do not expect His Majesty to condemn the Sazgara “referendum”. My concern is whether the 60MR is actually a movement against the Islamic Republic! You’ll note that I could have said against a Mafia system that operates as an Islamic Republic, and so implied that for its survival, and in order to continue its existence, this system could also function as a “Secular Islamic Republic”, hinting: most likely through a referendum of a type we are discussing.

My understanding of political history, however poor, is essentially an understanding of relationships. Should I close my eyes to the fact that everyone supporting the 60MR today also supported Mullah Khatami during the Shiite Taliban’s presidential elections? Should I close my eyes to the fact that the same reasons provided today in support of the 60MR---that it is a step in the right direction, that it would be counterproductive to oppose, that there are no alternatives, that it will undermine the power of the “hardliners”--- were given then, word by word, to rally support for Khatami and the “reformist’ gangsters? Can I ignore the fact that many of the signatories of the 60MR are sworn enemies of a form of government I find necessary for the very survival of my country? Can I ignore their criminal record, their fanatic ideology, and their decades long record in poisoning our political atmosphere?

The supporters of the 60MR may dismiss these as “extraneous” considerations and call us “Shahollahis” and “extremists” for exercising our right to question and to think. Yet arguments against the referendum need not touch on the character of its sponsors and signatories, and indeed most have been based on the text of the 60MR only.

I was pleased, but not surprised, to see that Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi, distancing himself from these characters (who parading as “opposition” abroad, ironically demonstrate their interpretation of and appreciation for the very concept of political opposition), urged everyone TO BE CRITICAL and TO THINK before making a decision either way.

Interestingly enough, about 2 weeks ago I came across a US Iranian newspaper in Persian (can't recall the name), but after glancing through some of the articles I got the distinct impression that it was an old fashioned leftie, Republican anti Monarchy paper. One of the articles about the 60MR, which was titled 60MR and promised to actually deal with issues about the 60MR, turned out to be a monarchy bashing and RP bashing piece, as usual, I guess the writers know that not even hardcore anti monarchists are going to leap at another RP bashing article so they have to sneak it in. Anyways the whole point of the article was that Sazgara and his 60MR were fizzling out because of the support of monarchists and RP, which I though was ludicrous. Sazgara simply does not have the name recognition, and opposition apporval that RP has, no matter what anyone says, your average peasant in Iran knows who RP is and has no clue who Sazgara is, so this article and its bogus premise was a joke. But I bring it up to point out, how different agendas are playing out here, and how radically different some of these agendas are.

In the end, I too fear that there are many attempts at preventing a CM in Iran, the same way there have been in the last 25 years. Jebhe Melli has even publicly acknowledged that the barabric Mullah$ regime is preferable to a monarchy, which is beyond insane and goes to show you how much destruction Jebhe Melli is willing to cause for its archaic and pathetic ideology.

Now many pundits claim that Iran is more of a democracy now because of its so called elections, which are not truly democratic, but that becomes irrelevant for those who look for just the form, even when the form is fake. Iran may have more elections now, but on every level imaginable there is less freedom, less prosperity, more brutal oppression, more totalitarianism, more destruction, more loss of strategic and international power, and more poverty and inequal distribution of wealth than under the Pahlavis. So for this lot, a Republic will do, simply because of the form, the fact that this Republic may not bring about a liberal democracy, greater personal freedom, progress, prosperity, and improved international standing the way a Constitutional Moanrchy can is irrelvant. Persoanlly I believe that only a CM can deliver a secualr and liberal democracy, greater personal freedom, progress, prosperity, stability, territorial integrity and improved international standing.

But it doesn't seem like the west is that keen on a CM, simply becomes a Monarchy is patriotic and nationalistic, and the west still hasn't forgotten the Shah's raising of oil prices which was done in the interest of iran's progress! But a Republic is favored simply because it delivers Iran to the highest coproate bidders, so Iran too can become another corrupt and dysfunctional Republic. In the end, if Iran is to propser its up to the people to choose a CM, and not get fooled by more 'hoghehbazi' of internal and western agents who are only interested in ripping off Iran!

Please consider to watch RP statement regarding National referendum and Public Questions and Answer Session with Iranian LA Media. the following video stream is from SOS Iran, please make your comments regarding new RP position after reviewing the video carefully.
It seems RP is making number of strategic mistakes that he might not be able to recover from his mistakes very easily . As part of dialogue with leadership please make your open constructive criticism as you feel appropriate here or call his office and make your private constructive criticism for correcting mistakes .

Their claim that the general depreciation of the 60MR was due to the support of “monarchists” and Reza Pahlavi tells far more of their credentials as journalists and their regard for democratic principles than anything about the Sazgara petition. Are not Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi and these “monarchists” Iranians? Did the creators of this petition preclude the participation of monarchists or any other Iranian group for that matter? What can we conclude about a petition that could affect the lives of all Iranians but which does not allow, or is expected not to allow the participation of, if not the majority, then several million Iranians? (And we still wonder, after these 25 years, whether it was these characters that used an illiterate cleric to realize their “democratic” ambitions, or whether Khomeini used them!)

Such misinformation aside, I should say it did not take long for the powers behind the scene to conclude that to accelerate the 60MR, they needed to dispel the inconclusiveness surrounding Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi’s endorsement. They needed his endorsement precisely for the reason you mention and the reasons we’ve often discussed: Sazgara, Kar and what-have-you are either hated, or not trusted, or not even recognized.

My own view of this petition is becoming more unfavorable by the hour. If the wording of the petition was not sufficiently confusing (“extremist shahollahis” like to understand a contractual document before giving it their endorsement and signature), if the articles and commentaries in its support where not adequately insulting to one’s intelligence, if the backgrounds of the familiar names and organizations that endorse it did not raise enough doubts, now, since Jan 5th to be specific, the very principle which its supporters claim to be yearning for in a future democratic Iran is being openly trampled upon. It is the freedom of speech.

Everywhere I look I see attempts to shut out criticism. Notice that I do not say dissent, even though dissent is a democratic right, but criticism. I’m sure you’ve heard the supporters of the petition as guests or callers in various TV and radio programs. “They’re Shahollahis!” “Disconnect their calls!” And according to Ghaemmaghami, “They’re professional no-sayers!” I’ve also heard that Ghaemmaghami and Hossein Mohri, the main promoters of this petition since day one, had earlier disconnected a call from one of the Mohamadi brothers calling from Iran, who phoned in to deny that jailed dissidents such as himself supported this petition. You know already of course that Souresrafil’s program has been cancelled, and that there is now talk of Reza Fazeli, who has been more than usually depressed as of late, leaving of his own accord.

Regarding the conference, my personal opinion is that it was not very convincing.

Regarding Souresrafil, Azadi did issue a brief, one-line statement: Breach of contract for appearing on another tv! Truly, truly STUPID move on the part of Mr. Abbasi.

1.) I have never been quite satisfied with Reza Pahlavis way of fighting the islamic republic

2.) I believe the communication between Reza Pahlavi and the people is very weak and people don´t know what this Reza Pahlavi really wants. RP appears on an interview every 3rd month in average.
Something very ironic is that Reza Pahlavi who speaks so much about the importance of a DIALOGUE, himself avoids every dialog he can. Every time RP has an interview with any of the persian media the time is so short that there is no time for DIALOUGE and DISCUSSIONS. This results in the fact that the interviewer asks a number of questions and Reza Pahlavi answer them. There is never time for a DIALOGUE. A dialogue means that for instance Mr Fazeli says,"I don´t agree on this issue, I think a better suggestion would be..."
That would be a DIALOGUE, substituting ideas and not having one sided interviews where one part asks and the other part answers.

3.) The distance between RP and his people is far. He appear very seldom on TV due to some cheap excuses that the TV:s are not acting well.
Through his office he is impossible to reach even if you are a famous TV character or a top political party member. The only person who seems to be active in his secretariat is Kamran Beigi, at least he answer a number of emails and telephone calls.

4.) Reza Pahlavi often speaks unclear and is not good at convincing people. It is unclear what he wants people to do. Over 20 times for sure in his recent speech he repeated "I am supporting the principal behind this idea". He also said that in 5 monts it is presidental elections and that it is a golden opportunity now for people to unite between this idea.

Suppose all people unite behind this idea, what guarantee is there that in 5 months the world will change its attitude towards Iran?

5+55) Reza Pahlavis support of the referendum has caused lots of disputes and internal conflicts among the monarchists. Some monarchists have said they don´t care who is the king of tommorrow, RP or someone else.
NITV, AZADI TV, X-TV,Pars TV etc all oppose the referendum. Iman Foroutan/HomaEhsan and Zia Atabay showed it clearly in the video. Zia Atabay asked Mr Pahlavi how he could suddenly decide to unite with Sazegara.
Mr Souresrafil has stopped his support of RP and Fazeli (last time I saw his was on jan 7) was both sad and angry.

Fortunately not only shahollahis have been against the referendum but also some intermediates. Already on nov 30 the secretary of RP sent a small email indicating their support of the referendum. Reza Pahlavis sign was not on that messege, which was sent by the secretary only.

But that messege caused a lot of ununity and anger and it is surprising how at a time when the referendum is almost dead reza pahlavi suddenly appers and supports it.

I guess Souresrafil was fired by Abbasi the same day as Reza Pahlavis speech. The removal of Souresrafil is a gigantic victory for pahlavis "today only unity" campaign.

Due to Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavis support of this referendum, I WILL NOT OPPOSE THE REFERENDUM, neither will I support it.
I think we should all keep critics silent and not oppose this idea.
We should act like RP wants and in 5 months we will see if Reza Phalavi who called this "yek forsat talayi!!!!!!" (=a golden opportunity!!!) turns out to be a new Hakha or not. Homa Ehsan compared Reza Pahlavis idea with Mr Ahura Yazdi´s which was good intentioned but unrealistic.

But my suggestion is that we support and follow mr Pahlavi regarding this referendum and if it leads nowhere which is quite likely, then RP has lost all his image and credibility.

I think Shahbanou makes a much better job than her son Reza Pahlavi:
-Shahbanou doesn´t have a bunch of "atrafiyan" (secretary etc)
-Shahbanou defends the late shah and her own family in her interviews
-Shahbanou cares about her supporters primarily, not about her enemies.

The result and difference can be easy seen comparing Shahbanous appearance in VOA TV in march where among a total numer of 33 telephone calls and emails 32 supported her, most of them VERY VERY EMOTIONALLY and strongly, people all said how much they loved shahbanou and some people almost cried and said "forgive us for what we did to you 25 years ago"

On the other side Reza Pahlavi appeared on VOA TV in both january and july 2004. He got a number of supportive calls and emails, but most telephones/emails were neutral. Not a single person showed any EMOTIONS towards Reza Pahlavi.

Reza Pahlavi lacks a lot of qualities he would need as a monarch and leader of a country with 2500 years of history behind his head. Yet he still have the chance to become monarch by winning in the referendum, considering how passive he is I believe he doesn´t need to worry too much about terror threats which is of course something positive for every Iranian. But he is not helping much in the liberation process of Iran.
But I hope somewhere in his mind he feels a responsibility towards Shahanshah Aryamehr, his great father whose last wish was that his son one day should bring prosperity back to Iran

Yes I support Reza Pahlavi. But if you read Reza Pahlavis goals on his website you see "freedom of speech" as one of the points. And freedom of speech is just what I am using now._________________Long live the memory of Shahanshah Aryamehr.
Long live Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi
Long live Reza Shah II

Their claim that the general depreciation of the 60MR was due to the support of “monarchists” and Reza Pahlavi tells far more of their credentials as journalists and their regard for democratic principles than anything about the Sazgara petition. Are not Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi and these “monarchists” Iranians? Did the creators of this petition preclude the participation of monarchists or any other Iranian group for that matter? What can we conclude about a petition that could affect the lives of all Iranians but which does not allow, or is expected not to allow the participation of, if not the majority, then several million Iranians? (And we still wonder, after these 25 years, whether it was these characters that used an illiterate cleric to realize their “democratic” ambitions, or whether Khomeini used them!)

Such misinformation aside, I should say it did not take long for the powers behind the scene to conclude that to accelerate the 60MR, they needed to dispel the inconclusiveness surrounding Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi’s endorsement. They needed his endorsement precisely for the reason you mention and the reasons we’ve often discussed: Sazgara, Kar and what-have-you are either hated, or not trusted, or not even recognized.

My own view of this petition is becoming more unfavorable by the hour. If the wording of the petition was not sufficiently confusing (“extremist shahollahis” like to understand a contractual document before giving it their endorsement and signature), if the articles and commentaries in its support where not adequately insulting to one’s intelligence, if the backgrounds of the familiar names and organizations that endorse it did not raise enough doubts, now, since Jan 5th to be specific, the very principle which its supporters claim to be yearning for in a future democratic Iran is being openly trampled upon. It is the freedom of speech.

Everywhere I look I see attempts to shut out criticism. Notice that I do not say dissent, even though dissent is a democratic right, but criticism. I’m sure you’ve heard the supporters of the petition as guests or callers in various TV and radio programs. “They’re Shahollahis!” “Disconnect their calls!” And according to Ghaemmaghami, “They’re professional no-sayers!” I’ve also heard that Ghaemmaghami and Hossein Mohri, the main promoters of this petition since day one, had earlier disconnected a call from one of the Mohamadi brothers calling from Iran, who phoned in to deny that jailed dissidents such as himself supported this petition. You know already of course that Souresrafil’s program has been cancelled, and that there is now talk of Reza Fazeli, who has been more than usually depressed as of late, leaving of his own accord.

Regarding the conference, my personal opinion is that it was not very convincing.

Regarding Souresrafil, Azadi did issue a brief, one-line statement: Breach of contract for appearing on another tv! Truly, truly STUPID move on the part of Mr. Abbasi.

You raise so many issues that I’m at a loss as to where to begin. I can only briefly suggest:

Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi’s support of the referendum may have caused lots of disputes and internal conflicts among some monarchists---many monarchists are in fact against the 60MR---but this is looking at the proverbial glass as half empty. In addition to having been an impetus to unity around a broad idea, it has also resulted in a great deal of positive dialog, even camaraderie, between monarchists and (nationalist) republicans to our benefit.

It is not fair to say that we don’t know what he wants; after all we’ve supported him on the assumption that he wants to see a secular democratic Iran. But I’ll readily admit that there has been a discrepancy between his behavior and our expectations of someone whom we regard as the leader of the opposition.

Souresrafil’s criticism should not be interpreted as breaking away from His Majesty. On the contrary, it is because he does not want Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi to bear the negative consequences of such significant a decision that he’s become a critic. As Cyrus put it, it seems RP is making number of strategic mistakes that he might not be able to recover from.

Leaders can be wrong. You’ll remember that Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi once called Mullah Khatami Iran’s Gorbachev! The statement was remarkably unfortunate, but it was in tune with the big lie disseminated by the IR’s clients through the world press. I chose this example to suggest another factor that we, his supporters and/or critics, have to bear in mind. Unlike us, RP is exposed and subject to foreign pressure. (You should consider this factor in all your political calculations.) Depressing and frightening, yes, but as Mohamad Reza Shah Pahlavi, himself a victim of foreign intrigue, suggested, a King (or a leader) is only as powerful as his people.

I most emphatically disagree with the 26 year old wait-and-see approach. Dear IB, make no mistake: the 60MR could be the end of our Monarchy. It could also GUARANTEE the continuation of the Mafia regime, probably under a farcical title as “the Secular Islamic Republic of Iran” indefinitely.

There is another wacky possibility. If you go back and watch that interview again you guys might see what I saw. Did anyone else notice RP's bizarre body language both in his statement and in the press interview? First of all, I hate to say it, but he looked like one of those guys that the regime tortures for months and then brings on national television for them to "confess to their crimes" and the poor guys just know that it's the last hours of their life and they are going to be executed in a little while and they try so hard not to break down but sometimes they just can't help it. In his statement, just for a split second, RP actually sounded like he was going to cry! I urge you all to watch it again if you can get the tape. It happens right when he is talking about the oppression that religious minorities have suffered. That sentence wasn't so depressing to make anyone want to cry. It was so bizarre. And in the press interview, he looks incredibly aggitated and nervous and he was even reading from a note that he took out of his pocket. He never reads from any notes. Plus his words were not the usual words he uses. Words like "goftmaan" and "shaffaffiyat e siyasi" are not his usual choice of words. They sound like something that might come out of one of the regime's reformist. Before this he was famous for writing his own speech. I know this idea is incredibly wacky and might not even be true but I think the regime threatened him or more likely threatened his family (his kids maybe) and forced him to say those things and that's why it took so long for him to release any type of statement either denying or confirming his support for this sham "referandum". Just something to consider.

Now if he did this out of his own convictions, then I definately don't support him. And if he did it because he was threatned (which is what I think has happened), then I still don't support him. Iran needs a strong leader who doesn't back down even when he or his family is threatened by the mullahs and their ilk.

Either way I've made up my mind. After this, I'm 100% behind anjomane padeshahi and already gave them some money for inside Iran last month. I wish I had more to give. I was leaning towards them anyways.

You know already of course that Souresrafil’s program has been cancelled, and that there is now talk of Reza Fazeli, who has been more than usually depressed as of late, leaving of his own accord.

Then what is left of Azadi TV?

Quote:

Regarding Souresrafil, Azadi did issue a brief, one-line statement: Breach of contract for appearing on another tv! Truly, truly STUPID move on the part of Mr. Abbasi.

Nonesense since he was there as a guest and not the host. Plus he has appeared on other TV channels before. I watched a rather long interview he did with Shahram Homayoun on Channel One as a guest about a year ago. So why wasn't he fired for "breach of contract" before? Because he was there as a guest.

Quote:

Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi’s support of the referendum may have caused lots of disputes and internal conflicts among some monarchists---many monarchists are in fact against the 60MR---but this is looking at the proverbial glass as half empty. In addition to having been an impetus to unity around a broad idea, it has also resulted in a great deal of positive dialog, even camaraderie, between monarchists and (nationalist) republicans to our benefit.

Yeah, I don't see much of a "dialogue". They are mocking monachists because our Shahzadeh "turned on us". (well turned on you since I support anjomane-padeshahi now).